Professional Documents
Culture Documents
February 2014 LRFD Bridge Design 4-1: 4. Structural Analysis and Evaluation
February 2014 LRFD Bridge Design 4-1: 4. Structural Analysis and Evaluation
In all but the most complex bridges, time-dependent behavior will not be
modeled. The impacts of creep, shrinkage, and relaxation will be
accounted for by using code prescribed equations for these effects. While
time-dependent material effects are not modeled, designers and
evaluators of continuous post-tensioned structures should include
secondary moments due to post-tensioning in their analysis.
4.1 Design QC/QA Engineering software and spreadsheets play an important role in the
Process design of bridges. The Bridge Office evaluates and utilizes vendor
software and develops spreadsheets to assist office personnel. This
process does not remove the responsibility of the designer to verify
(through hand calculations, other programs, past experience, etc.) that
results are accurate, cost efficient, constructible, and reasonable. The
Bridge Design Automation Committee evaluates programs that may be
used by in-house designers and maintains a list of approved
spreadsheets.
original design and the design check must be resolved as part of the
quality control/quality assurance (QC/QA) process. Thorough checks for
all designs are crucial. This goal is often more difficult to achieve when
using vendor-supplied design products because of the user’s inability to
see the complete set of assumptions and computations within the
software. Due to the varying intricacy of bridge elements, different levels
of checking must be used.
Basic
Basic components are primarily designed by hand calculations, by a
spreadsheet, or with a vendor-supplied design application. Examples of
bridge elements that may be reviewed using a basic level check include,
but are not limited to, abutments, splices, bearings, and most cases of
prestressed concrete beams.
Intermediate
Intermediate components are those that are designed using a software
design package, but whose outputs cannot easily be verified using hand
computations and spreadsheets. Bridge elements requiring an
intermediate level check include, but are not limited to, piers, straight
steel girders, steel box girders, and prestressed beams that are flared or
have variable width overhangs.
Unlike software packages that fall under the basic level check, validation
of design software used for an intermediate level check is impossible
because of the variety or complexity of the bridge component. Although
running the design example from this manual, where one is available,
provides some assurance in the software, there remain too many
potential variables unchecked. Therefore, the software cannot be
adequately validated, and an independent analysis is required for this
type of analysis. A comparison of input, intermediate output and final
output values from the design and independent check calculation
packages is also required. The check may be performed by a second
software package or via hand calculations or a spreadsheet. Depending
on the complexity of the design, a hand check may use moderate
simplifying assumptions. Sound engineering judgment must be used in
making those assumptions. Input values that must be checked include
geometry and live load distribution factors. At a minimum, output values
must be compared for section properties, dead load moments and shears,
live load moments and shears, and code checks. The checking engineer
need not examine each load case generated by a program; however, load
cases should be reviewed to validate loads were correctly combined and
applied to find the maximum effects. Determination of critical live load
cases for checking should be accomplished by load patterning.
Complex
Complex bridge components are those that cannot reasonably be
designed by hand or spreadsheet, even if moderate simplifications are
made. Bridge elements that require a complex level check include, but
are not limited to, concrete box girders, curved steel girders, and
structures requiring a soil-structure interaction model.
FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-4
4.2 Load The LRFD Specifications encourage the use of either refined or
Distribution approximate methods of analysis for determination of load distribution.
The default analysis method for determination of the lateral load
distribution for typical deck on beam bridges and slab span bridges is the
approximate method of analysis given in the LRFD Specifications. Lateral
[4.6.2] live load distribution factors determined using the LRFD Specifications are
dependent on multiple characteristics of each bridge and there are
specific ranges of applicability for their use. Extending the application of
such approximate methods beyond the limits requires sound and
reasonable judgement. Otherwise refined analytical methods should be
used.
4.2.1 Dead Load Deck, Wearing Course, Future Wearing Surface, Railing, Barriers,
Distribution and Medians
For beam bridges, the dead load of the deck is distributed to the beams
based on their respective tributary widths. Superimposed dead loads
(wearing course, future wearing surface, railings, barriers, and medians),
with the exception of sidewalk loads, are to be distributed equally to all
beam lines.
Sidewalks
Distribute sidewalk loads to the beams by simple distribution except
when checking load case 2 as specified in Article 4.2.3 of this manual.
panels, and sound walls, whose load acts entirely outside the exterior
beam, should be assumed to be carried by the exterior beam.
4.2.2 Live Load Equations and tables for live load distribution factors are provided in the
Distribution LRFD Specifications.
4.2.2.1 Steel and For typical beam bridges, use the live load distribution factor (LLDF)
Prestressed formulas provided in the LRFD Specifications for interior beam flexure
Concrete Beams (single lane, multiple lanes, and fatigue), and interior beam shear (single
lane, multiple lanes, and fatigue). For exterior beams, use the lever rule
[4.6.2.2] and LLDF formulas to determine the amount of live load carried by the
exterior beam. In addition, use the rigid cross section equation (LRFD
C4.6.2.2.2d-1) for steel beam bridges. The number of diaphragms/cross
frames found in steel beam bridges makes rigid cross-section rotation
and deflection a valid behavior to consider. Use of the rigid cross section
equation is not required for design of precast prestressed concrete
exterior beams.
Unlike the Standard Specifications, the LRFD live load distribution factors
(LLDF) for beam bridges are dependent on the stiffness of the
components that make up the cross section [LRFD Equation 4.6.2.2.1-1].
Theoretically, the distribution factor changes for each change in cross
section (at flange plate changes in plate girders, for example). However,
this is more refinement than is necessary. For simple span structures a
single LLDF (computed at midspan) may be used. For continuous
structures, a single LLDF may be used for each positive moment region
and for each negative moment region, with the moment regions defined
by the dead load contraflexure points. For bridges with consistent
geometry (same number of beam lines in each span, etc.) the largest
positive moment LLDF may be used for all positive moment locations.
Similarly, the largest negative moment LLDF may be used for all negative
moment regions. Also note that for continuous structures, use the span
length “L” as defined by LRFD Table 4.6.2.2.1-2 for LLDF calculations.
[4.6.2.2.2e] Apply the live load distribution reduction factor for moment per
LRFD Article 4.6.2.2.2e.
[4.6.2.2.3c] Apply the live load distribution correction factor for shear to all
beams and throughout the entire beam length.
FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-6
4.2.2.2 Slab Spans Design concrete slabs and timber decks using a one foot wide longitudinal
and Timber Decks strip. The LRFD Specifications provide equations for live load distribution
[4.6.2.3] factors (LLDF) that result in equivalent strip widths, E, that are assumed
to carry one lane of traffic. Convert the equivalent strip width to a live
load distribution factor for the unit strip by taking the reciprocal of the
width.
1
LLDF
E
2) Place vehicular live load on the sidewalk and in adjacent traffic lanes
with no pedestrian live load on the sidewalk. For this load case,
assume dead load, including sidewalk, is carried equally by all beams.
4.3 Load Rating The bridge load rating determines the safe load carrying capacity.
Ratings are calculated for a new bridge and are recalculated throughout
the bridge’s life as changes occur.
Unlike design, where only one benchmark or level of safety is used, two
different levels have historically been used for load rating. These rating
levels are referred to as the “inventory rating” and “operating rating”.
The inventory rating corresponds to the factors of safety or levels of
reliability associated with new bridge designs. The operating rating
corresponds to slightly relaxed safety factors or reliability indices and is
used for infrequent, regulated loads. Calculations for overload permit
evaluations and for bridge weight postings are made at the operating
level.
The Design Data block on the front sheet of a set of bridge plans should
contain the LRFR HL-93 operating rating factor for the bridge.
FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-7
When the bridge plan is to the point where all the essential information
for the superstructure is shown, the plan should be sent to the Bridge
Rating Unit. They will calculate the operating rating for the bridge.
Bridges designed for the local road system are generally prepared by the
local agency and/or their consultants. It is the responsibility of the local
agency to assure that ratings are calculated and reported to the Bridge
Asset Data Management Unit.
4.4 Substructure The overall fixity of the bridge should be examined in detail for bridges
Fixity on steep grades, moderate to severe curvature, or when the columns are
tall or slender. The following guidelines for providing fixity at bearings
should be followed.
For short bridges on steep grades, the down hill abutment should be
fixed. For longer bridges the flexibility of each pier and its bearings need
to be considered to determine the appropriate substructure units to fix.
If pier flexibility and geometry permit, a minimum of two fixed piers per
expansion unit should be used. For very flexible piers, such as pile bents
or slender columns, the expansion bearings may be redundant (the pier
may move before the bearings begin to slide).
For typical prestressed I-beam bridges with two sets of bearings on each
pier (per beam line), sufficient anchorage to the pier is provided by using
one line of bearings with anchor rods at a fixed pier. For river piers and
for spans over 145 feet, designers should fix both sets of bearings.
4.5 Structural For redundant structures, the distribution of internal forces is dependent
Models on member stiffnesses. Engineering judgement needs to be exercised
when assigning member properties and boundary conditions to determine
the internal forces of members.
4.6 Design The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications are extensive, but do not
Methodology & cover all bridge types. In addition, they were not written for bridge
Governing rehabilitation projects. MnDOT policy regarding these topics is given
Specifications below.
4.6.1 Pedestrian Design pedestrian bridges in accordance with the LRFD Guide
Bridges Specifications for Design of Pedestrian Bridges. The pedestrian live load
specified in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications is only for
vehicular bridges that carry pedestrian traffic. The pedestrian bridge
guide specifications address the design of pedestrian bridges.
4.6.2 Repair When repairing existing bridges, it is often not economically feasible to
Projects design the repaired structure to meet all current design code
requirements, including live load capacity. To help establish uniform
procedures for use on bridge repair projects, MnDOT developed the
Bridge Preservation and Improvement Guidelines (BPIG). These
guidelines are updated at regular intervals and provide a systematic
approach to planning and performing bridge preservation and
rehabilitation projects. The BPIG also includes condition and cost criteria
for bridge replacement projects, as well as policies for upgrading
substandard features like barriers and end posts. Appropriate bridge
design standards have been established based on investment level, along
with expected outcomes in terms of slowed deterioration, improved
condition, or service life extension.
For bridges with sidewalks, consider both of the load cases given
in Article 4.2.3 of this manual. Consideration may be given to
waiving Load Case 2 (vehicular load applied to the sidewalk) when
the anticipated remaining life of the bridge is less than 10 years.
Minimum LRFR requirements for substructures (Note that this does not
apply to foundations):
Substructures are typically load rated only when significant
additional loads will be applied. Evaluations may also be required
if safety inspections note substantial deterioration or there is
damage that indicates an inadequate design. Members that
require evaluation will be noted in the repair recommendations.
For bridges with sidewalks, consider both of the load cases given
in Article 4.2.3 of this manual. Consideration may be given to
waiving Load Case 2 (vehicular load applied to the sidewalk) when
the anticipated remaining life of the bridge is less than 10 years.
For cases where the required minimum inventory rating factor cannot be
achieved, other options within the LRFR provisions of the MBE
specifications and MnDOT policy can be considered. These options would
need to be discussed on a case-by-case basis with the Bridge Ratings
Engineer, Final Design Unit Leader, Bridge Construction Regional
Engineer, State Bridge Design Engineer, State Bridge Construction and
Maintenance Engineer, and the appropriate District personnel. In
addition, a design exception can be recommended to the District based
on investment level, cost, expected bridge service life, and service
interruption risk.
4.6.3 Railroad Railroad bridges are to be designed in accordance with the most current
Bridges and AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering.
Bridges or
Structures near Designers should be aware that oftentimes railroads have specific criteria
Railroads for structural design of items carrying their tracks or in the vicinity of
their tracks. The criteria vary from railroad to railroad. For example, the
Duluth Mesabe & Iron Range Railway has a special live load. Other
railroads have specific loading criteria and geometric limits for
excavations near their tracks.
JUNE 2015 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-12